Is this “the great ship jam of the century” also caused by human factors? It is not yet known. However, the only certainty is that, according to the announcement issued by the leaser, Evergreen Shipping, there was no outgoing power failure before the “Changci” was stranded. According to this, the charterer, Evergreen Shipping Co., Ltd., does not assume responsibility, and points directly at the Suez Canal Administration and the shipowner Nippon Masei Steamship Co., Ltd. This article is from WeChat official account:Tencent Finance (ID: financeapp) , author: Meng Jie, editor: Shen Chong, the original title: “rejection pot? Egypt claims against the Japanese shipowner, but the shipowner blames the weather! Who is looking for a loss of more than 6 billion US dollars”, the title picture comes from: Visual China
As soon as the “Great Ship Jam of the Century” on the Suez Canal was opened to navigation, the “tug-of-war” of claims has begun.
According to a report by the Russian Satellite News Agency Ismailia on March 29, Mamish, an advisor to the Egyptian President’s Seaport and Suez Canal Affairs, said that the captain was responsible for the blockage of the canal, and Egypt will move closer to blocking the Suez Canal. The owner of the “Long Give” container cargo ship of the week claimed compensation.
It is reported that the owner of the “Long Give” is Japan’s Masaei Steamship Company, which is operated by Taiwan Evergreen Shipping.
According to the news released by Evergreen Shipping on March 25, after the owner’s confirmation, the crew, ship, and cargo of the “Long Give” are safe and sound, and no marine pollution has occurred. At the same time, it is clarified that the ship was grounded. There was no outgoing power trip.
“Denying that the ship has tripped electricity is equivalent to indirectly eliminating the ship’s own fault.In fact, it is insinuating that the problem lies with the navigator of the Suez Canal Authority. Yang Jie, a senior partner of the Shanghai Huiye Law Firm, believes that in order to avoid compensation, the parties involved have shown signs of arguing with each other, and it may be difficult to resolve the claim in a short period of time.
The most expensive compensation in history caused by a ship jam is on the way. According to Tencent News, the canal was paralyzed for a week, the Suez Canal lost more than 80 million U.S. dollars in economic losses, global trade lost 6 to 10 billion U.S. dollars, and 422 ships were stranded in the canal. Of course, this has not yet taken into account the difficult to quantify default costs such as cargo delays.
1. Sky-high compensation?
At 15:04 on March 29th, Egypt time, the “Long Grant”, which was almost the same height as the Shimao Building in the United States, resurfaced, and with the assistance of a tugboat, it smoothly moved out of the originally stranded river and restored the Suez Canal. Normal traffic.
But the restoration of navigation does not mean complete navigation. Osama Rabie, chairman of the Egyptian Suez Canal Authority, said on the 29th that all vessels waiting to pass are expected to pass through the canal within 3 to 4 days.
It is reported that the Suez Canal channel has been blocked for nearly a week. As of the 29th local time, a total of 422 ships were stranded in the canal.
However, in this short period of one week, the world has experienced a rare scenario where oil prices fluctuate sharply, freight rates rise rapidly, and even the supply of toilet paper is tight.
The first thing to bear the brunt is trade. As the goods transported through the Suez Canal account for 12% of world trade, crude oil, a global strategic material, accounts for nearly a quarter of it, including grains, oil and other essential daily necessities. Therefore, the agency predicts that this “ship jam” will cause as much as US$400 million in losses to world trade per hour (approximately RMB 2.618 billion).
Don’t even mention the loss of the “money tree” to Egypt due to the suspension of operations for a week. On the 29th, Egyptian President Seaport and Suez Canal Affairs Advisor Mamish called to shipowner Japan Masae Steamship Company to claim for compensation including physical losses, economic losses and rescue vessel expenses caused to the Suez Canal Authority caused by the grounding of the cargo ship.
It is reported that the cost of each passage of the Suez Canal usually ranges from US$300,000 to US$500,000, and the agency expects its economic loss to be as high as US$12 million to US$14 million per day.
But, are these all the contents of compensation? Yang Jie, senior partner of Shanghai Huiye Law Firm, said that according to the “Maritime Law”, The scope of compensation for this “ship jam” mainly includes three parts: loss of cargo value, ocean freight and insurance premium.
Among them, the loss of cargo value mainly comes from the owner’s claim. If the ship is carrying a living thing, once a death occurs, the total loss will be calculated; but if it is durable goods such as machinery, the repair can be reused, and the value loss will be Relatively small.
Ocean freight mainly refers to the loss of commercial interests, container fees, port fees, tolls, etc. caused by late delivery. However, the losses caused by late delivery are often difficult to support in legal practice due to the difficulty of proof.
According to the previous news of The Wall Street Journal, all parties roughly estimated that the accumulated possible claim costs have reached US$100 million (approximately 650 million yuan), and many media have paid sky-high compensation.
“It’s too early to talk about sky-high compensation.” Yang Jie said, the key depends on the cause of the accident? Is it a human factor or a non-human factor?
Yang Jie said that if it is a non-human factor caused by the weather, the parties involved can go to the international or local maritime court to apply for a maritime liability limitation fund; if it is a non-weather human factor such as management, most ships have been purchased Insurance and responsibility will be transferred to the Freight Asset Protection Association accordingly.
“Both types of compensation are not unlimited compensation, so they will not be sky-high compensation.” Yang Jie said, taking the limitation of liability for maritime claims as an example, claims for compensation for non-personal injuries are based on ship tonnage and international compensation. The right of payment and so on to calculate the compensation limit. Therefore, the current key is to find out what caused the accident.
Second, claim “tug-of-war”
However, it is not easy to get the survey results in a short period of time.
It is understood that this freighter with the Panamanian flag is in fact operated by Evergreen Shipping Company in Taiwan, China, with 25 Indian employees and the owner of the ship is the Japanese Zhengrong Steamship Company. At the time of the incident, there were two navigators from the Suez Canal Authority on board.
Due to the large number of parties involved, this claim has begun to fall into a “tug-of-war”.
The news released by Evergreen Shipping Co., Ltd. on March 24 shows that when the “Long Give” entered the Suez Canal from the north of the Red Sea, it was 6 nautical miles from the southern end of the estuary, and it was suspected of being hit by an instant strong wind, causing the hull to deviate from the course, causing an accident. Bottomed out.
Are strong winds the culprit? The Suez Canal Authority does not buy it for this reason. “ThisTherefore, the charterer, Evergreen Shipping Co., Ltd., does not assume responsibility, and is directed at the Suez Canal Administration and the shipowner Japan Masae Steamship Company. According to the above-mentioned maritime experts, ship accidents mainly include weather factors such as whole ship skipping, wind, and human factors. Therefore, existing information shows that this incident is more likely to be caused by the latter two causes.
“The weather factor is the easiest reason to find out.” Yang Jie said, because of the weather conditions, the weather radar and log book on the ship are the best evidence. They are like the black box of an airplane. The cause of the accident can be identified.
But the complexity is that the identification of human factors is not simple. “For example, is it because the navigator of the Suez Canal Administration did not deliver the correct instructions to avoid undercurrent reefs, because the navigator made a mistake in operation? Or did the captain and chief mate hired by the shipowner fail to operate and cause the grounding?” Yang Jie thinks It is precisely because it is difficult to obtain evidence after the fact that it is difficult to find out the truth of such man-made accidents.
He believes that an international third-party investigation team may eventually be established to ensure fairness for all parties.
It is reported that the Secretary General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) said a few days ago that he is looking forward to obtaining information from the investigation of the incident. Information so that IMO can take action on any appropriate recommendations derived from the investigation results.
However, the tremor in the global industrial chain caused by a single ship still sounded the alarm for many foreign trade companies.
According to IMO statistics, from the beginning of 1986 to the end of 2015, there were a total of 1257 maritime accidents in the first 10 years, a total of 4394 incidents occurred in the interim 10 years, and the number dropped to 3648 in the past 10 years. Although the number of maritime accidents has decreased in the past ten years, the number of existing accidents is still of a relatively high magnitude today with advanced technology and increasingly stringent IMO regulations.
“Moreover, even if the responsibility for the accident is clear, the claim process may be a’marathon’.” Yang Jie estimated that combined with previous cases, the investigation of the cause of the accident may take 6 months or even a year, not to mention the complicated follow-up The compensation was made.
The chain reaction of the “Great Ship Jam of the Century” has not ended yet. For Chinese foreign trade companies, how to use international trade terms to avoid risks may be a question worth pondering.
This article is from WeChat official account: